R1-Battlefield 3 and how it will run

howdy guys

so here is the rn downu

BFBC2 which runs on frostbite barely is playable on the M11x R1.

Medal of honor on frostbite runs amazignly on max settings on the R1

We all know BF3 will run of frostbite, now the question is, will it run like MOH or BFBC2

if you have any info, questions, or other things please leave a comment,

i really hope i dont have to buy the console version. 24 person battlefield just isnt a battelfield game.

thanks-Jesse

 

isn't BF3 DX11 only?

 

i don't think so, it might be 10 & 11 but definatly no 9...so we will have to wait

 

bf3 will use frostbite 2.0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostbite_Engine

 

Battlefield 3 leaving DX 9 behind, Frostbite 2 engine good news for PC gamers - Neoseeker News Article

so no DX9 or DX10 support.

 

does this mean i cant play BF3 on my m11x?

 

it may suggest so....unless the R3 has a DX11 GPU that uses the same power as the 335m.

 

i think you will be able to play it but not maxed

 

ok im so sorry but i am confused, why would they develop a game that only runs on the newest PCs. Im pretty sure all m11x owners have Direct X 10, so this means we cant play?

 

i don't know how you can play a DX11 game on non-maxed settings if the m11x does not even have a DX11 GPU.

because DX9 is getting old and you really can't push games if you're using DX9.

 

How does the R1 handle BF:BC2 if the settings are all low?

 

but can i run it on DX10? basically is my main question

 

It would be a bad choice if they go with DX11 only, I dunno, I don´t know if they are gonna choose DX11 only, but they are gonna leave behind a HUGE ammount of users....

 

It is playable on all low.

 

i found this i think it should run on dx10 card

Battlefield 3 Will NOT work on XP, 64-bit Recommended/DX10/DX11 - Battlefield 2 - Discussions - Battletracker.com

 

Frostbite 2.0 supports Dx10. Just not DX9. The nvidia 335mGT support Dx10. I would suspect the cpu in the m11x will be the issue. Whether it has enough horsepower.

BW, StevenX

 

Fatality-thanks man, that kidna cleared things up for me, it would be a disasterous mistake to make it DX11 exclusive, because many computers today are probobly running DX10 like mine

StevenX, eyah, im hoping the game will run like MEdal of Honor, it rusn amazign on m11x

 

I can run Bad Company 2 at 40-60 FPS on medium settings on my M11x R2... framerate is higher if I overclock. Using the 260.99 drivers.

I assume I will be able to run BC3 at low/medium settings. It's gonna push the M11x pretty hard though.

 

The R1 can run BFBC2 at near R2 speeds with modding and further overclocking.

 

i play BFC2 full settings OC prccocer and i play with out any fps lag i dont know how u say barly playbel and oh ya i use game booster ;p Battel field 3 is still to soon i wonder if m11x can play bullet storm ;p

 

there's a just games that should stay on the desktop: BF3 is one of them!

 

Why? It's not even released yet so we don't know how it runs or will run.

 

i don't have high hopes though and i am more interested in seeing how crysis 2 goes on the m11x instead.

 

I seriously doubt that. I was getting FPS in the teens at best with things set to high and I have the same specs. Yea its playable if you turn everything down, but then whats the point? I play this on my desktop, and there's no going back once you have seen the game cranked with fluid gameplay.

 

I believe Bulletstorm runs on the UE3 and is made by Epic so it should run fine.

 

I play BFBC2 on my R1 all the time, you can get playable (over 30) framerates on 32 man servers and it's great. I just OC'd my machine and did the Throttle Adjustment Registry Trick

 

Sadly it will run terribly like bc2. Well, it will run worse with the doubled playercount and destruction. The processor just isn't up for it.

 

I guess we'll just have to see. Don't you think it's a bit early for making this thread?

 

Im not seeing how BFBC2 runs like crap on this thing. I played for well voer 5 days playtime on the PS3, and moving over to PC with the m11x R1 was an improvment, IMHO.

 

Off topic, but I'm gonna be pissed if I can't run Crysis 2, Deus Ex: HR, or Mass Effect 3 on my M11x. And I'd want to try BF3, but IDK if I want to pick up a game that my M11x can't run...

 

Not to sound like a stick in the mud, but doesn't this game come out at the end of 2011? From a technology standpoint, thats AGES from now. I guess I can relate though... I would rather purchase this game on PC vs A Console... specially if the PC is where the Jets are (Consoles never had jets). With all that said though, BF Games have a lifespan of over a year so odds are that you will end up getting a quicker setup and your PC can grow into your game.

 

Why would consoles not have jets? The only thing different from the PC version is the (most likely) lowered graphics and the player count.

 

I can't remember which one off hand it was, but one of them in the past only had flying vehicles for the PC version. This was a long time ago though.

 

I think its good that games update there engines *COUGH* Starcraft 2 on DirectX9 still *COUGH*

I dont really know much about engines and compatibility with hardware, but didnt the BC2 release say it was only
DirectX 10 but you can change the settings to directX 9?

 

There's only been one Battlefield game that was released on both PC and consoles as the same base game: Bad Company 2. And it only had choppers.

There was a "Battlefield 2" game released on consoles, but it was nothing at all like the PC version, and wasn't intended to be. It was Battlefield in name only.

All that said, going back to the OP, Medal of Honor was only Frostbite engine in multiplayer. it actually uses a different, internally developed engine in single player. I know, it sounds friggin' crazy, but that's the truth. At this point, there's not much we can really speculate on, since this version of the game engine has changed drastically. If the developers put some work into scalability, it'll run fine on machines like the m11x. But if they decide they don't want to bother, then it'll be unplayable - or worse, a slideshow. Basically, we have no real way to know.

 

I know there was a Battlefield on the original Xbox that I played the crap out of.

 

Yeah when i referred to MOH i meant Multiplayer, but yeah they released some Screenshots on YouTube, M11x can probobly handleit

 

It only said dx9 wasn't supported...

 

Supposedly they have made three version of the forstbite 2.0 engine. Each for each major system. PC, Xbox, PS3. Hopefully they believe in optimization over "omg it's so pretty on PC".

 

if that's the case then they can make all 3 platforms look the best rather than do the lowest common denominator in terms of graphics and performance.

 

So BF3 gameplay footage was revealed today

Battlefield 3 : BF3 - EA

looks heavy, but lets hope its optimized well!

 

Like Crysis would Run on a P3

 

The R2 can handle Crysis 2 on GAMER I am very confident the R2 at least can handle BF3 - sorry R1's haha

 

Crysis 2 isn't massive depended on CPU, gamer is also maxed out on m11x R1, might not be as high as R2 frames bust still enough to enjoy.

BF 3 will use the Frostbite engine, which is going to be a massive CPU hog. If you think BF BC 2 was alot, be prepared for shock and aww.

MLAA will be implemented which should help AA performance, but needs a Good CPU, and also deferred Shading, which also requires Threads (agian R2 has an advantage).

The R2 will not perform well and R1 will prob not even be able to push over 10 fps.

This game is a graphical leap over most games, and get ready to run it super low on R2.

Also it doesn't support DX 9, which means that our GPU will be the limiter this time as well, not just the CPU.

Crysis 2 runs well because it doesn't have massive foliage, the Cry engine was never "Demanding" because of super graphics, its because it had wide open areas with alot of trees, shrubs, shaders and shadows. once you got inside your frames can go to 60 FPS even on the R1, and even in small areas.

This game (Crysis 2) has 0 free roam compared to the first1, so your seeing what the devs want you to see. So yes the graphics will look better but since there isn't much on screen compared to the first, we can expect a frame increase...which is harder trees and jungle or city (which shaders dont need to be insane detailed because its brick, and since we're on the ground they can use less textures and detail on parts out of Reach).



I fully switched over to my pc for my main PC gaming, once you hit constant 100+ (even 60+) fps you can't go back to 20-40 fps.

I do how ever play valve games on it and games at school during my free time.

My Predictions for BF3:

R1 - unplayable multiplayer, unplayable single player.
R2 - playable on lowest indoors small server, single player unplayable.

These predictions are mine, and I do have a different standard of what playable is, and what enjoying the game is.

Alot of ppl seem to settle these days just to justify their purchase. I'm done with that

Cool thread though! I can't wait for BF 3! Seems like even the ps3 might be 2nd best because of MLAA and deferred shading, which use SPE (yes E, SPU is the Synergistic Processing Unit, which the SPE is made of...people confuse them).

 

Because it's 2011 already dude, not all vendors can makes games compatible just because users dont have fast enough PC's.

You can argue they just lost a sale then but something tells me the profit will out weigh the losses for the few that dont have decent gaming rigs.

 

64 slot multi-player servers.

That's amazing...

 

Not that amazing... BF2 was 64 players.

MAG is up to 256 players.. now thats amazing.

 

Look at the graphical difference. You'll need at least a 10000 FPS server to get no lag server side.

 

True. With the exploding buildings and what not.

 

Obviously the R1 is going to have trouble.

The R2 should be able to handle it... the question will be what settings in the .ini file will need to be tweaked.